what idea was espoused with the webster hayne debates

But I take leave of the subject. . It is only by a strict adherence to the limitations imposed by the Constitution on the federal government, that this system works well, and can answer the great ends for which it was instituted. . The Senate debates between Whig Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Democrat Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina in January 1830 started out as a disagreement over the sale of Western lands and turned into one of the most famous verbal contests in American history. He must cut it with his sword. Gloomy and downcast of late, Massachusetts men walked the avenue as though the fife and drum were before them. But that was found insufficient, and inadequate to the public exigencies. In The Webster-Hayne Debate, Christopher Childers examines the context of the debate between Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and his Senate colleague Robert S. Hayne of South Carolina in January 1830 . How do Webster and Hayne differ in regard to their understandings of the proper relationship among the several states and between the states and the national government? Speech of Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, January 27, 1830. . Even more pointedly, his speech reflected a decade of arguments from other Massachusetts conservatives who argued against supposed threats to New England's social order.[2]. If this is to become one great consolidated government, swallowing up the rights of the states, and the liberties of the citizen, riding and ruling over the plundered ploughman, and beggared yeomanry,[8] the Union will not be worth preserving. The faction of voters in the North were against slavery and feared it spreading into new territory. 1. emigration the movement of people from one place to another 2. immigration a situation in which resources are being used up at a faster rate than they can be replenished 3. migration the leaving of one's homeland to settle in a new place 4. overpopulation the movement of people to a new country 5. sustainable development a situation in which the birth rate is not sufficient to replace the . During his first years in Congress, Webster railed against President James Madison 's war policies, invoking a states' rights argument to oppose a conscription bill that went down to defeat.. Thousands of these deluded victims of fanaticism were seduced into the enjoyment of freedom in our Northern cities. This means that South Carolina is essentially its own nation, Georgia is its own nation, and so on. . Correspondence Between Anthony Butler and Presiden State of the Union Address Part II (1846). He tells us, we have heard much, of late, about consolidation; that it is the rallying word for all who are endeavoring to weaken the Union by adding to the power of the states. But consolidation, says the gentleman, was the very object for which the Union was formed; and in support of that opinion, he read a passage from the address of the president of the Convention[3] to Congress (which he assumes to be authority on his side of the question.) Webster scoffed at the idea of consolidation, labeling it "that perpetual cry, both of terror and delusion." What Hayne and his supporters actually meant to do, Webster claimed, was to resist those means that might strengthen the bonds of common interest. Do they mean, or can they mean, anything more than that the Union of the states will be strengthened, by whatever continues or furnishes inducements to the people of the states to hold together? They will not destroy it, they will not impair itthey will only save, they will only preserve, they will only strengthen it! It is to state, and to defend, what I conceive to be the true principles of the Constitution under which we are here assembled. . But, the simple expression of this sentiment has led the gentleman, not only into a labored defense of slavery, in the abstract, and on principle, but, also, into a warm accusation against me, as having attacked the system of domestic slavery, now existing in the Southern states. The following states came from the territory north and west of the Ohio river: Ohio (1803), Indiana (1816), Illinois (1818), Michigan (1837), Wisconsin (1848) and Minnesota (1858). In 1830, the federal government collected few taxes and had two primary sources of revenue. The gentleman takes alarm at the sound. Let's start by looking at the United States around 1830. Webster was eloquent, he was educated, he was witty, and he was a staunch defender of American liberty. The significance of Daniel Webster's argument went far beyond the immediate proposal at hand. . We met it as a practical question of obligation and duty. President John Quincy Adams and the Election of 1824. . It has been said that Hayne was Calhoun's sword and buckler and that he returned to the contest refreshed each morning by nightly communions with the Vice-President, drawing auxiliary supplies from the well-stored arsenal of his powerful and subtle mind. The Union to be preserved, while it suits local and temporary purposes to preserve it; and to be sundered whenever it shall be found to thwart such purposes. . For the next several days, the men traded speeches which contemporaries of the time described as the greatest orations ever delivered in the Senate. Sir, an immense national treasury would be a fund for corruption. It is one from which we are not disposed to shrink, in whatever form or under whatever circumstances it may be pressed upon us. The Northwest Ordinance. . Create your account, 15 chapters | . By the time it ended nine days later, the focus had shifted to the vastly more cosmic concerns of slavery and the nature of the federal Union. Sir, I cordially respond to that appeal. It was motivated by a dispute over the continued sale of western lands, an important source of revenue for the federal government. The discussion took a wide range, going back to topics that had agitated the country before the Constitution was formed. My life upon it, sir, they would not. . . We found that we had to deal with a people whose physical, moral, and intellectual habits and character, totally disqualified them from the enjoyment of the blessings of freedom. Will it promote the welfare of the United States to have at our disposal a permanent treasury, not drawn from the pockets of the people, but to be derived from a source independent of them? Sir, the very chief end, the main design, for which the whole Constitution was framed and adopted, was to establish a government that should not be obliged to act through state agency, or depend on state opinion and state discretion. The debate itself, a nine-day long unplanned exchange between Senators Robert Y. Hayne and Daniel Webster, directly addressed the methods by which the federal government was generating revenue, namely through protective tariffs and the selling of federal lands in the newly acquired western territories. Benton was rising in renown as the advocate not only of Western settlers but of a new theory that the public lands should be given away instead of sold to them. Since as Vice President and President of the Senate, Calhoun could not take place in the debate, Hayne represented the pro-nullification point-of-view. . All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. Hayne maintained that the states retained the authority to nullify federal law, Webster that federal law expressed the will of the American people and could not be nullified by a minority of the people in a state. While the Union lasts, we have high, exciting, gratifying prospects spread out before us, for us and our children. On January 19, 1830, Hayne attacked the Foot Resolution and labeled the Northeasterners as selfish and unprincipled for their support of protectionism and conservative land policies. Daniel webster, in a dramatic speech, showed the. . At the time of the debate, Webster was serving his term as Senator of Massachusetts. . It would enable Congress and the Executive to exercise a control over states, as well as over great interests in the country, nay, even over corporations and individualsutterly destructive of the purity, and fatal to the duration of our institutions. In whatever is within the proper sphere of the constitutional power of this government, we look upon the states as one. I would definitely recommend Study.com to my colleagues. We will not look back to inquire whether our fathers were guiltless in introducing slaves into this country. The dominant historical opinion of the famous debate between Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Robert Young Hayne of South Carolina which took place in the United States Senate in 1830 has long been that Webster defeated Hayne both as an orator and a statesman. Eloquence threw open the portals of eternal day. Our notion of things is entirely different. - Women's Rights Facts & Significance, Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points: Definition, Speech & Summary, Fireside Chats: Definition & Significance, JFK's New Frontier: Definition, Speech & Program. And now, Mr. President, let me run the honorable gentlemans doctrine a little into its practical application. Webster-Hayne Debate book. . I'm imagining that your answer is probably 'I do.' Daniel Webster, in a dramatic speech, showed the danger of the states' rights doctrine, which permitted each State to decide for itself which laws were unconstitutional, claiming it would lead to civil war. Hayne's First Speech (January 19, 1830) Webster's First Reply to Hayne (January 20, 1830) Hayne's Second Speech (January 21, 1830) Webster's Second Reply to Hayne (January 26-27, 1830) This page was last edited on 13 June 2021, at . . Visit the dark and narrow lanes, and obscure recesses, which have been assigned by common consent as the abodes of those outcasts of the worldthe free people of color. . The 1830 Webster-Hayne debate centered around the South Carolina nullification crisis of the late 1820s, but historians have largely ignored the sectional interests underpinning Webster's argument on behalf of Unionism and a transcendent nationalism. Senator Foote, of Connecticut, submitted a proposition inquiring into the expediency of limiting the sales of public lands to those already in the market. It would be equally fatal to the sovereignty and independence of the states. The tendency of all these ideas and sentiments is obviously to bring the Union into discussion, as a mere question of present and temporary expediency; nothing more than a mere matter of profit and loss. The object of the Framers of the Constitution, as disclosed in that address, was not the consolidation of the government, but the consolidation of the Union. It was not to draw power from the states, in order to transfer it to a great national government, but, in the language of the Constitution itself, to form a more perfect union; and by what means? [Its leader] would have a knot before him, which he could not untie. Nor those other words of delusion and folly,liberty first, and union afterwardsbut everywhere, spread all over in characters of living light, blazing on all its ample folds, as they float over the sea and over the land, and in every wind under the whole Heavens, that other sentiment, dear to every true American heartliberty and union, now and forever, one and inseparable! Hayne quotes from Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, December 26, 1825, https://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/letter-to-william-branch-giles/?_sft_document_author=thomas-jefferson. Nullification, Webster maintained, was a political absurdity. Robert Young Hayne spent more than two decades in elected offices, including mayor of Charleston, member of South Carolina's legislature, attorney general, and then governor of the state. The growing support for nullification was quite obvious during the days of the Jackson Administration, as events such as the Webster-Hayne Debate, Tariff of 1832, Order of Nullification, and Worcester v. Georgia all made the tension grow between the North and the South. Sir, as to the doctrine that the federal government is the exclusive judge of the extent as well as the limitations of its powers, it seems to be utterly subversive of the sovereignty and independence of the states. We look upon the states, not as separated, but as united. Jackson himself would raise a national toast for 'the Union' later that year. Several state governments or courts, some in the north, had espoused the idea of nullification prior to 1828. To them, this was a scheme to give the federal government more control over the cost of land by creating a scarcity. He was a lawyer turned congressional representative who eventually worked his way to the office of U.S. Secretary of State. The people read Webster's speech and marked him as the champion henceforth against all assaults upon the Constitution. . . I wish to see no new powers drawn to the general government; but I confess I rejoice in whatever tends to strengthen the bond that unites us, and encourages the hope that our Union may be perpetual. The United States, under the Constitution and federal government, was a single, unified nation, not a coalition of sovereign states. An error occurred trying to load this video. Let us look at the historical facts. Address to the People of the United States, by the What are the main points of difference between Webster and Hayne, especially on the question of the nature of the Union and the Constitution? I love a good debate. [2] We deal in no abstractions. Southern states advocated for strong, sovereign state governments, a small federal government, the western expansion of the agricultural economy, and with it, the maintenance of the institution of slavery. The great debate, which culminated in Hayne's encounter with Webster, came about in a somewhat casual way. It was of a partizan and censorious character and drew nearly all the chief senators out. Union, of itself, is considered by the disciples of this school as hardly a good. . Liberty has been to them the greatest of calamities, the heaviest of curses. lessons in math, English, science, history, and more. . His speech was indeed a powerful one of its eloquence and personality. . What started as a debate over the Tariff of Abominations soon morphed into debates over state and federal sovereignty and liberty and disunion. Web hardcover $30.00 paperback $17.00 kindle nook book ibook. A four-speech debate between Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Robert Hayne of South Carolina, in January 1830. The measures of the federal government have, it is true, prostrated her interests, and will soon involve the whole South in irretrievable ruin. 136 lessons . But, sir, we will pass over all this. . Whose agent is it? Massachusetts Senator Daniel Webster's "Second Reply" to South Carolina Senator Robert Y. Hayne has long been thought of as a great oratorical celebration of American Nationalism in a period of sectional conflict. No hanging over the abyss of disunion, no weighing of the chances, no doubting as to what the Constitution was worth, no placing of liberty before Union, but "liberty and union, now and forever, one and inseparable." Representatives of the northern states were concerned by the rapid growth of the nation; just 27 years earlier, the Louisiana Purchase had nearly doubled the size of the nation, and the newly elected President Andrew Jackson was hungry for more territory. . This is the sense in which the Framers of the Constitution use the word consolidation; and in which sense I adopt and cherish it. Sir, the opinion which the honorable gentleman maintains, is a notion, founded in a total misapprehension, in my judgment, of the origin of this government, and of the foundation on which it stands. The Constitutional Convention: The Great Compromise, The Webster-Hayne Debate of 1830: Summary & Issues, The History of American Presidential Debates, Jonathan Edwards and the Great Awakening: Sermons & Biography, Who Was Susan B. Anthony? Are we in that condition still? By means of missionaries and political tracts, the scheme was in a great measure successful. I understand him to maintain this right, as a right existing under the Constitution; not as a right to overthrow it, on the ground of extreme necessity, such as would justify violent revolution. .Readers will finish the book with a clear idea of the reason Webster's "Reply" became so influential in its own day. . This episode was used in nineteenth century America as a Biblical justification for slavery. Webster replied to his speech the next day and left not a shred of the charge, baseless as it was. As a pious son of Federalism, Webster went the full length of the required defense. But his calm, unperturbed manner reassured them in an instant. He remained a Southern Unionist through his long public career and a good type of the growing class of statesman devoted to slave interests who loved the Union as it was and doted upon its compromises. I hold it to be a popular government, erected by the people; those who administer it responsible to the people; and itself capable of being amended and modified, just as the people may choose it should be. State governments were in control of their own affairs and expected little intervention from the federal government. Beyond that I seek not to penetrate the veil. She has a BA in political science. Well, it's important to remember that the nation was still young and much different than what we think of today. The idea of a strong federal government The ability of the people to revolt against an unfair government The theory that the states' may vote against unfair laws The role of the president in commanding the government 2 See answers Advertisement holesstanham Answer: If I had, sir, the powers of a magician, and could, by a wave of my hand, convert this capital into gold for such a purpose, I would not do it. But I do not understand the doctrine now contended for to be that which, for the sake of distinctness, we may call the right of revolution. The Webster-Hayne debate laid out key issues faced by the Senate in the 1820s and 1830s. Historians love a good debate. It laid the interdict against personal servitude, in original compact, not only deeper than all local law, but deeper, also, than all local constitutions. Hayne launched his confident javelin at the New England States. The debate was on. Far, indeed, in my wishes, very far distant be the day, when our associated and fraternal stripes shall be severed asunder, and when that happy constellation under which we have risen to so much renown, shall be broken up, and be seen sinking, star after star, into obscurity and night! See what I mean? . Hayne, South Carolina's foremost Senator, was the chosen champion; and the cause of his State, both in its right and wrong sides, could have found no abler exponent while [Vice President] Calhoun's official station kept him from the floor. The Webster-Hayne debate was a famous debate in the United States between Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina.It happened on January 19-27, 1830. What idea was espoused with the Webster-Hayne debates? . Ostend Manifesto of 1854 Overview & Purpose | What was the Ostend Manifesto? . . . Connecticut and other northeastern states were worried about the pace of growth and wanted to slow this down. He entered the Senate on that memorable day with a slow and stately step and took his seat as though unconscious of the loud buzz of expectant interest with which the crowded auditory greeted his appearance. Speech on Assuming Office of the President. This seemed like an Eastern spasm of jealousy at the progress of the West. Expert Answers. . The Webster-Hayne Debate between New Hampshire Senator Daniel Webster and South Carolina Senator Robert Young Hayne highlighted the sectional nature of the controversy. Besides that, however, the federal government was still figuring out its role in American society. . I understand the gentleman to maintain, that, without revolution, without civil commotion, without rebellion, a remedy for supposed abuse and transgression of the powers of the general government lies in a direct appeal to the interference of the state governments. Mr. Hayne having rejoined to Mr. Webster, especially on the constitutional question. This leads us to inquire into the origin of this government, and the source of its power. Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819) | Case, Significance & Summary. All regulated governments, all free governments, have been broken up by similar disinterested and well-disposed interference! . Religious Views: Letter to the Editor of the Illin Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Douglas Faction), (Northern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Breckinridge Facti (Southern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. I would strengthen the ties that hold us together. . Sir, we will not stop to inquire whether the black man, as some philosophers have contended, is of an inferior race, nor whether his color and condition are the effects of a curse inflicted for the offences of his ancestors. The people had had quite enough of that kind of government, under the Confederacy. Sir, I should fear the rebuke of no intelligent gentleman of Kentucky, were I to ask whether, if such an ordinance could have been applied to his own state, while it yet was a wilderness, and before Boone had passed the gap of the Alleghany, he does not suppose it would have contributed to the ultimate greatness of that commonwealth?

Metal Ridge Cap Installation, Masonic Junior Warden Speeches, Different Versions Of Head Shoulders, Knees And Toes, Gamal Abdelaziz Daughter, Gina Tolleson Santa Barbara Magazine, Articles W